• unenlightened
    Dude, I'm not attacking you, don't panic. I'm suggesting that talk about legal rights is rather unimportant. You have a relationship with your wife that is bigger than her rights and your rights, and the rights of any hypothetical foetus. The last comment was somewhat facetious, and my main point in relation to fathers is that 'where they are' is not one place. some fathers deserve consideration that they do not get, and some fathers get consideration that they do not deserve, and the law is unlikely to be better able to distinguish them than the mother.

    And we don't either know where the mother is, or where the foetus is, except that they are stuck with each other, and only the mother can express an opinion about that. So perhaps a responsible pro-life man or woman, whether father, grandfather, neighbour or stranger, will be prepared to put their own life on the line, to do whatever it takes to support mother-and-foetus, which is a whole other thing to demanding laws and asserting rights.

    I am not that responsible, so I do not claim to be pro-life. I am close enough to the bottom to know that bearing the responsibility for a child while being deprived of the social support and opportunity to fulfil that responsibility is an intolerable situation that many in our civilised caring society find themselves in, and while that is so, the law is just another weapon used against them, to keep them there and pass the blame on to the victims.

    I am against coercing women to continue a pregnancy, but all for bribing them to do so.
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.